“In Chiawelo, we are united as a community; people are kind, loving and supportive but most of all it's a place full of diversity- it allows us to learn different cultures, languages and teaches us to respect different people”. These are the words of eighteen-year-old Sanele Nkosi, the youngest member of the Chiawelo Budgeting for Change (CBC) Group, based in Soweto, Johannesburg. The group is a reflection of Sanele’s words, including many different people from many different walks of life: traditional Healers, local community members, clinic workers, community health workers, ward based outreach teams, clinic committee members and local government officials amongst others. In this Community Statement, the group highlight with evidence the health realities and resource gaps faced around the COVID-19 pandemic, including lack of access to social protection, food security, sanitation and adequate health care, gender-based violence, unsafe transport and reopening of educational institutions, youth unemployment, lack of support to the small business sector, for those in chronic unemployment and for community-led COVID-19 responses and safety initiatives and poor working conditions for Community Health Workers. They call for resources for a people- centred response to the COVID-19 pandemic and access to the rights people are entitled to.
Resource allocation and health financing
This study of progress in financial risk protection in Uganda used data from the Uganda National Household Surveys for 2005/06, 2009/10, 2012/13 and 2016/17, measuring financial risk protection in terms of catastrophic health care payments and impoverishment. Although catastrophic health payments at the 10% threshold decreased from 22.4% in 2005/06 to 13.8% in 2012/13, they increased to 14.2% in 2016/17. The percentage of Ugandans pushed below the national poverty line decreased from 5.2% in 2005/06 to 2.7% in 2016/17. The distribution of both catastrophic health payments and impoverishment varied across socio-economic status, location and residence. The authors suggest targeted interventions reduce ‘out-of-pocket’ (OOP) payments among those affected and ensure that public health services are funded adequately, through forms of mandatory prepayment.
Emeritus Professor Diane McIntyre presents her chapter on: 'How best we can achieve a universal health system: a public conversation'. The chapter was published in the recent South African Health Review. She calls for a broadening of the national discourse on universal health coverage and proposes that the term is replaced with the term 'universal health system' which she suggests is less open to misinterpretation.
To achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.4, countries have been urged to introduce sin taxes, such as those on sugar. Others have argued that such taxes may affect employment, economic growth and increase poverty. There is limited or no reliable evidence on this. Using a conceptual framework of relationships among SDGs as contradictory, reinforcing, or neutral, the authors used the recent introduction in Zambia of an equivalent 3% tax on non-alcoholic beverages, implicitly targeted at sugar-sweetened beverages to test the issue. While the goal of reducing non-communicable diseases is stated, concerns were raised that such a tax would be detrimental to the Zambia sugar value chain which contributes about 6% to GDP. The authors discuss that contradictions depend on a number of contextual factors, and make two conclusions about sugar taxation in Zambia. First, they argue that the current tax rate of 3% is likely neutral to be because it is too low to have any health or employment effects. However, the revenue raised can be reinvested to improve livelihoods. Secondly, they suggest increasing the tax rate but taking care to ensure that the rate is not too high to generate contradictions, carefully assessing important parameters such as elasticities and alternative economic livelihoods.
Thousands of ex-gold mineworkers in South Africa are suffering from silicosis and lack the medical screening, compensation, healthcare and support they need and deserve. Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) led a campaign calling on gold companies to provide decent health and compensation in a campaign for justice for Southern African gold mineworkers with silicosis and tuberculosis. The campaign included: protesting outside the High Court; attending and speaking at many Anglo American AGMs; organising petitions; and producing campaign briefings. On 26 July 2019, the South Gauteng High Court approved a class action settlement worth at least R5 billion (approximately £268 million). The settlement establishes the Tshiamiso Trust, which will be responsible for paying compensation to eligible gold mineworkers and their dependents in Southern Africa.
The authors contend that the priorities of Northern donors dictate the aid agenda, implemented by the non-state and Southern ‘partners’ they fund. These priorities often clash with the needs and concerns of communities, governments and civil society in many countries around the world. The aid space is dominated by powerful interests, while the voices of those most affected by health inequity are regularly tokenised or excluded from the conversation. The authors argue that many actors within the sector – even among communities and civil society – do not question the underlying premise and structures of health aid. Their own ideas and world views have been shaped by, and for, aid and the industry that supports it. Questioning aid poses challenges to the professions, livelihoods and sources of power for those who work within the sector. Furthermore, whilst health aid is important in some situations, on its own aid can never lead to a world where all people can live healthy lives. Signatories of the declaration believe that collective social action in solidarity as one global community, working together to address the root causes of the struggle for health, can transform aid into an equitable means of ensuring health rights. Through the Kampala Initiative, the signatories commit to expose, explore, challenge and transform health aid through dialogue, advocacy, activism and action. They commit to build cooperation and solidarity for health, within and beyond the practice of aid, to build a future where health justice and equity are realised, and aid is no longer a necessity.
As low- and middle-income countries undertake health financing reforms to achieve universal health coverage, there is renewed interest in making allocation of pooled funds to health-care providers more strategic. To make purchasing more strategic, countries are testing different provider payment methods. They therefore need comprehensive data on funding flows to health-care providers from different purchasers to inform decision on payment methods. Tracking funding flow is the focus of several health resource tracking tools including the System of Health Accounts and public expenditure tracking surveys. This study explores whether these health resource tracking tools generate the type of information needed to inform strategic purchasing reforms, using Kenya as an example. A qualitative assessment of three counties in Kenya shows that different public purchasers, that is, county health departments and the national health insurance agency, pay public facilities through a variety of payment methods. Some of these flows are in-kind while others are financial transfers. The nature of flows and financial autonomy of facilities to retain and spend funds varies considerably across counties and levels of care. The government routinely undertakes different health resource tracking activities to inform health policy and planning. However, a good source for comprehensive data on the flow of funds to public facilities is still lacking, because these activities were not originally designed to offer such insights. The authors therefore argue that the methods could be enhanced to track such information and hence improve strategic purchasing, and also offer suggestions how this enhancement can be achieved.
Increasing fiscal space is argued to be important for health sector public financing. One strategy is to mobilize additional government revenues through new taxes or increased tax rates on goods and services. The authors illustrate how countries can assess the feasibility and quantitative potential of different revenue-raising mechanisms. The processes and results from country assessments in Benin, Mali, Mozambique and Togo are reviewed and synthesized. The studies analysed new taxes or increased taxes on airplane tickets, phone calls, alcoholic drinks, tourism services, financial transactions, lottery tickets, vehicles and the extractive industries. Study teams in each country assessed the feasibility of new revenue-raising mechanisms using six qualitative criteria. The quantitative potential of these mechanisms was estimated by defining different scenarios and setting assumptions. Consultations with stakeholders at the start of the process served to select the revenue-raising mechanisms to study and later to discuss findings and options. Exploring feasibility was essential, as this helped rule out options that appeared promising from the quantitative assessment. Stakeholders rated stability and sustainability positive for most mechanisms, but political feasibility was a key issue throughout. The estimated additional revenues through new revenue-raising mechanisms ranged from 0.47–1.62% as a share of general government expenditure in the four countries. Overall, the revenue raised through these mechanisms was small. The authors advise countries to consider multiple strategies to expand fiscal space for health.
The author reports that Larry Summers, a former World Bank chief economist, viewed the Banks Ebola financing scheme as a problem. As recounted by another former World Bank economist, Olga Jonas, the World Bank involvement of the private sector in funding countries affected by Ebola in the wake of the 2014-2016 outbreak led to the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF) as a form of investor scheme for private financing. However, as Jonas points out, the PEF stipulates a payout of $45 million for Ebola if the officially confirmed death toll reaches 250 (which occurred in the DRC [Democratic Republic of the Congo] by mid-December 2018), but only if at least 20 deaths occurred in a second country. Given that the WHO lists only one multi-country outbreak amid more than 30 that occurred in a single country, this requirement is viewed as inappropriate. Rather than a lack of funds, the author argues that vigilance and public-health capacity have been the main deficiencies. When governments and the World Bank are prepared to respond to infectious-disease threats, money flows within days. The World Bank has said that the PEF is working as intended by offering the potential of ‘surge’ financing. However its triggers are said to guarantee that payouts will be too little because they kick in only after outbreaks grow large. The author concludes that the best investment of funds and attention is in ensuring adequate and stable financing for core public-health capacities, that the PEF has failed. It should end early — and that IDA funds should go to poor countries, not investors.
This study examined the experiences of poor people with health financing reforms that target them. The authors conducted a qualitative cross-sectional study in two purposively selected counties in Kenya, using focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with people in the lowest wealth quintile and health insurance subsidy programme beneficiaries. Health financing reforms reduced financial barriers and improved access to health services for poor people in the study counties. However, various access barriers limited the extent to which they benefited from these reforms. Long distances, lack of public transport, poor condition of the roads and high transport costs especially in rural areas limited access to health facilities. Continued charging of user fees despite their abolition, delayed insurance reimbursements to health facilities that health insurance subsidy programme beneficiaries were seeking care from, and informal fees exposed the poor to out of pocket payments. Stock-outs of medicine and other medical supplies, dysfunctional medical equipment, shortage of healthcare workers, and frequent strikes adversely affected the availability of health services. Acceptability of care was further limited by discrimination by healthcare workers and ineffective grievance redress mechanisms which led to a feeling of disempowerment among poor people.